4.4 Article

Catalogue of the Diptera (Insecta) of Morocco- an annotated checklist, with distributions and a bibliography

期刊

ZOOKEYS
卷 -, 期 1094, 页码 1-466

出版社

PENSOFT PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.3897/zookeys.1094.62644

关键词

Bibliography; classification; gnats; midges; new combination; new records; taxonomy; true flies

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The faunistic knowledge of Diptera in Morocco from 1787 to 2021 is summarized and updated in this catalogue, which includes 3057 species, 948 genera, and 93 families. The classification has been revised based on current interpretations, literature reviews, fieldwork, and expert knowledge. The data primarily come from literature with 1225 references consulted. Each family has been reviewed and updated by taxon experts, providing information on the expected number of species and distribution in Morocco. One new combination species is proposed.
The faunistic knowledge of the Diptera of Morocco recorded from 1787 to 2021 is summarized and updated in this first catalogue of Moroccan Diptera species. A total of 3057 species, classified into 948 genera and 93 families (21 Nematocera and 72 Brachycera), are listed. Taxa (superfamily, family, genus and species) have been updated according to current interpretations, based on reviews in the literature, the expertise of authors and contributors, and recently conducted fieldwork. Data to compile this catalogue were primarily gathered from the literature. In total, 1225 references were consulted and some information was also obtained from online databases. Each family was reviewed and the checklist updated by the respective taxon expert(s), including the number of species that can be expected for that family in Morocco. For each valid species, synonyms known to have been used for published records from Morocco are listed under the currently accepted name. Where available, distribution within Morocco is also included. One new combination is proposed: Assuania melanoleuca (Seguy, 1941), comb. nov. (Chloropidae).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据